Death of this War Dragons


#203

Last warning. This is not LC.


#204

Come on Lutrus let us have fun :rofl:


#205

Come on don’t kill it now. It is turning interesting
Wait let me grab my popcorn
image


#206

When did I ever say dread has platinum teams defend their level 5? You’re just making stuff up now lol. I said we’ve attacked the 5ta and seen platinum show up. Now those platinum may have been invited by a sapphire team, or they may have just said hey let’s go over there where there’s a battle going on.


#207

It’s been a long time since I found a thread amusing here. I’ve enjoyed reading everything. But most, if not all, messages are not even related to the subject. Even the original post was mostly a complaint about an alliance. The game has problems. PG needs to fix those problems. But I don’t get why there’s a need to include the top two teams for this? Obviously, if you drag them here, there will be people who will be on their side. So it’s becoming a back and forth jabs. And then it goes further and further. You can post and complain but it would be taken more seriously if you avoid including teams. We’re all playing a game. Of course, there are those who will come out at the top. That’s not their fault.


#208

You are absolutely correct that participating in Atlas is one of the best ROIs in the game. And I do agree that gear matters more than almost anything else…between players and/or teams of similar stature. Put a pin in that.

I think the question of whether Atlas comes down to individual or team is a bit of a blurry divide, both because there is no team without individuals, but also because it sort of depends on where you are playing. At the top, it is certainly about having a team full of good, active and/or spending players. And ideally a team full of players who, if nothing else, can get online at the same time and follow instructions for coordinated attacks etc.

But as you move down from there and increasingly start getting into situations where a single very large player (or a couple-few) can sway the course of a battle between teams that are, on average, much smaller (as I have seen happen, in battles I’ve been part of), then it is less about having a good team than it is about having singular entities who are big enough to make a difference.

I spent a very long time on a team that does quite well in Atlas. It has a good number of players, relative to the average team, that are either above average in flying skill or who are interested in being better. They are pretty organized, and do quite well in Atlas battles in terms of coordination and strategy (should be noted however, that Atlas too, runs on inherited advantages to some extent, as castles are easier to keep than to conquer, and players coming into a team benefit from that for sure). I’ve also been on teams where the opposite is true, where they are not as organized, etc., and yet those teams are doing better in Atlas simply because they have a larger collection of players that have near-max bases and end-game dragons (in other words, bigger team).

This sort of leads to my answer to the question of inherited advantage, which I think @Tinsir addressed to a great extent: the ability to keep getting good (often bigger) players because you are already doing well is a major advantage. In Atlas this then extends to having more players that get more glory, because Atlas works best if you are big with big dragons. More glory means more lines, and more lines means more gear (and more shards, which you need for better gear). Which brings me back to the importance of gear.

That importance cannot be understated…but it does absolutely nothing to address massive power imbalances between teams already doing well and teams working to do well, let alone when stronger teams combine forces (as is the smart thing to do, given the lack of incentive to do otherwise). This leaves those teams making a go of it with little recourse but to…call in their friends. And now we’re into mega alliances…


#209

How anyone can try to have a serious debate while skirting around the fact that this game is ruled by money is beyond me. It feels like this is the only video game, sport, or competitive environment at all that some of you have ever been involved in, and have no idea what being good at one entails.

This is not a skill-based game outside of an individual battle and some coordinating. This is a game entirely won on the backs of dollar bills. Stop with the “You can be better if you tried” argument, because it’s extra tired at this point. No you can not. You can be better if you spend, period. SOME people, like Odin for example, admittedly have ZERO other responsibilities and can make decent personal progress with time spent, however the majority understand that this is a P2P environment (because responsibilities) and that the bigger your wallet the better you will do. It’s a team game, and you can not overstate the influence of spending/higher teams as a factor. To even begin to go into that I’d need another novel-worthy post. You simply can not catch up to people who spend more than you and have a decent understanding of where to spend the resources they get from using REAL MONEY to advance their game. I made more progress with $400 than I did in 4 years. Period. The earlier you spent, the bigger an advantage you have had since you (should have) been able to carve yourself a comfortable position over others who may have followed the same or similar steps but started later on. The only way they are catching up is with more money, and likely a lot more time spent.

Now that we aren’t disillusioned here, let’s talk about ways we can close the overall gap with ACTUAL skills, and reduce the incentive for these 50-100+ team alliances to form and simply put, rule the (game) world. There is no end-game that’s been discussed here that doesn’t end with this game driving away competitive players to other games or hobbies where they won’t be locked behind a paywall and where people have the audacity to say they are good at something they spent money to be “good” at. I wish I knew how to word that sentence a little better, but you get what I’m saying. It’s akin to somebody inheriting millions of dollars from their Dad and then boasting about how great of a businessman they are :roll_eyes:

Dread has been at the top for a long time because yes, they obviously have a good understanding of the mechanics (which they have helped to form along the way…) and they are an attractive team to want to deal with because of the benefits they may provide. But this, again, just comes from spending a bunch of money earlier than anyone else and always having BEEN at the top.

There are other teams “at the top” who also follow those steps, but money will always win until there are practices put in place that would allow someone without money to obtain the same or very similar result. But that’s not this game. It never will be. The profit model of mobile gaming and micro transactions has killed “skill” being the major factor that it was when we were growing up until recent years.

If there was a Tetris competition/tournament where people could enter and choose to pay someone for certain blocks to fall in Tetris, you think the guy who’s unable to afford that service but let’s say holds the high score would still be able to win just off of his efforts? Or would a bunch of blue long pieces being dropped for the guy who was never going to get close to that score based on his ability just ruin the fun of the game and enjoyment for everyone else at the tournament? There are too many analogies that end the same and all correlate to what is happening here (and across mobile games in general)

You just have to come to grips with the fact that Dread has the monopoly on this game via payment and subsequently, influence. The only reason most people still play this game who are not P2P is because we enjoy it. It’s a free app at the end of the day, and eventually will die based on it’s current model. We the people have been saying it for years, and if you don’t recognize PG’s incentive for former players to come back and get a bunch of free stuff as desperation and the beginning of it’s demise then by all means, keep arguing with the echo of the massive player base because your ego has blinded you from what will happen. Video games die. Technology itself will leave this game in the dust and many others. Then you’ll be out thousands and thousands of dollars and time, and all that ego isn’t going to get you your money back and you’ll have to go look for a new environment to bully people with your extra cash. It’s telling to the kind of person you are outside of the game that you involve yourself in the forums to further bully people and discount their opinions on the game @Panda - as I used to tell you back in old Diamond.

I agree with some earlier who have said that it’s not Dread’s fault - because it isn’t. They are doing the best with the current incentives and opportunity and you can’t fault them for that. The problem lies with PG and the structures they have and continue to put in place that are not based around anything but profit. They waited this long to promote some kind of player happiness but have the audacity to hone in on Ryuu of all things? It’s a joke lol

At some point you just have to wait for a game to kill itself and get what enjoyment you can from it. If you have never heard of EVE online, I implore you to do some investigating to see that this is not some kind of isolated issue. Money rules the world, and that doesn’t change in the digital world with micro transactions involved. We aren’t playing skill based games anymore, which is why topics on how to fix the skill/pay gap, Wars, incentives to stick to leagues/fights of relatable power levels, etc. are ignored in favor of slight changes to the economy to give you the IMPRESSION that they listen/care when the reality is, they understand fully that changing the economy for everyone does nothing. It’s a bigger carrot hanging on the end of the same stick.

Now can we please drop this?

Dread isn’t doing anything wrong, and being butthurt about it isn’t going to do anything for you or anyone else. Under the current system, there is no scenario outside of everyone else who is not Dread (including their own allies) banding together to remove them from a place of influence and power through our collective effort where they do not continue to dominate and eventually kill the game off through force.

Whether you wouldn’t like to admit it or just can’t see it, the end of the game truly is near the way things are currently going. Be it that everyone quits - or everyone revolts. The game as you know it will die.

So. Diamond 1. If you want it to change, coordinate wars like you do your atlas alliances and push Dread out of Diamond. Coordinate and switch your alliances to run Dread out of Atlas. Panda’s already pointed out himself that the Neutral zone is an option, so give him the same option and see if he’s comfortable there. The influence as a result of the money they have is now worth more than they money they’ve spent. So take it away from them and take it for yourselves. Otherwise this app continues down the same road we’re already on and coming to the forums to complain about it isn’t doing anything for you.

Easier said than done of course, which is partly why it hasn’t been done, but also, people in general are pretty weak-minded and sheepish, and going against the grain when things aren’t necessarily going bad doesn’t make a lot of sense. So you just gotta wait for the time we all suspect is coming and the doomsayers to be right. Once the game is on life support, maybe, just maybe people will start to make moves like I’m suggesting out of sheer desperation. Until then, PG will pacify those feelings with bigger and bigger carrots on the end of the same sticks. Because Psychology.


#210

I do think a large part of the misunderstanding here comes from people with fundamentally flawed positions but with understanding of the circumstances motivating their own flaws–and varying levels of outrage for others’ flaws–interacting. Here, consider this entirely hypothetical situation:

A certain alliance is gifted a castle by leadership formerly of a longtime bitter enemy team, prior to a near-disband by that team. Said leadership then abandons ship, joining their former enemies in this alliance. The aforementioned alliance sees no problems with this.

They then leverage these gifted castles to attack a certain other team, who has been given a castle named for and formerly owned by a disbanded team. These prior owners cheated so flagrantly that they received the extremely rare punishment of having Atlas access stripped. The recipient of their gift also sees no problems with this, and feels the castle is theirs by rights.

These are different kinds of flaws, sure, and it’s possible to have a consistent ethos that says that one of these is really bad and the other is perfectly fine. But I suspect the actual cause for some of the anger on both sides is a combination of blindness to your own flaws and outrage at others’.

There’s also an issue of what you want from the game, and here I am genuinely sympathetic to both sides.

So, there’s a monochromatic bear here whose reappearance on these forums has been a bright spot in an otherwise kinda bland thread. This person’s team is extremely good at the game and, as far as I understand his arguments here, just wants to fight against other comparable teams in a fun, competitive environment (that they can still decisively win). This desire is somewhat confounded by the fact that no comparable teams actually exist; they are in a class of their own.

They could probably achieve some facsimile of this dynamic tomorrow if they really wanted to via the mechanism of booting the teams in their 5TA and attacking them, but this sort of challenge likely feels artificial and unsatisfying, inasmuch as it essentially boils down to “be bad at diplomacy” in a game where diplomacy is at least half the game. (It also punishes people who’ve helped them.) They could also decide to wear mittens while playing for a month, which would make the game more challenging, but the difficulty in either case does not lend itself to any interesting complexity; hence, neither is attractive to them.

There’s another team that laboriously fought their way to near the top and successfully fought off enemies before, but probably can’t beat 10 of the top 15 teams in the game all together. They feel that this dynamic is kind of crappy and do the only thing they can, i.e. bringing in smaller teams to try to hold what they feel is theirs, by weight of numbers. Some might call this a press gang, others would call it teamwork and unity against an otherwise unstoppable threat. I have my opinions here, but do see the merits of the other side’s.

I don’t know. I am but a humble platinum fellow who has about as much interest in global politics as the burgomeister of a medieval potato farming village had in the wars of relative superpowers like the Principality of Kiev or the Holy Roman Empire.

I do suspect that being hit by larger teams is altogether less shocking for platinum teams than the Dreadnought people posting here believe it to be, since it happens constantly and always has. I’m aware of and appreciative of the past policy of non-retaliation that others here have alluded to, but you’re aware that other diamond teams have no such scruples, right? I don’t mean to let the wind out of your righteous fury, but it’s hard for a lot of plat teams to tell if they’re being stomped on as retribution or just because it’s a day ending with Y.


#211

Nailed that. Bravo.


#212

Technically white is a colour…as is black…so bi-chromatic?

Oh and let’s not forget the red cousins…


#213

Both white and black are the ends of color gradients (like the pole in our earth)

On topic.
:thinking:
Based on what I’ve read above, the main problem circles around Atlas…

Do we have a hypothetical solution? :eyes:


#214

There’s been a few bandaids proposed but no actual solutions I think


#215

Ohh since you replied to in response to dread VsRR thought you meant 5Team you said is them lol…but still won’t agree with you coz you are the one of the teams who started inviting plat teams so it’s quite obvious they did same…


#216

This one is actually a reply to your comment on purpose this time Rogue :joy::wink:

There are no fixes based on the for-profit model of the game. The fundamental basis of the game in relation to that means this will be an ongoing problem until support for this game is withdrawn entirely from PG and they move onto newer, more lucrative ventures. They can only play vulture for so long before all of us other mice see the dead bodies piled up around this trap and choose to look for cheese elsewhere.

Teams being as big as they are and the relationships formed by players in their time playing this game, along with money already thrown into the game and a reluctance to lose the results of that investment of money/time are possibly the biggest and only reason this game isn’t dead yet. But it won’t save it forever if nothing is done about balance and incentives.

@mechengg is always the first person to come out in defense of PG giving things away and villify us as a community being too greedy - which is a hilariously hypocritical standpoint given the profit model. The “free products” are free for them in the first place. The people who spend money are still going to spend. Sometimes you just have to jump up the size of the carrot by a large margin all at once instead of continually finding slightly larger ones.

A free to play player or at least someone who purchases Elite should have the capability to reach end game content. Period. Micro transactions SHOULD be available to supplement time lost due to responsibilities or lack of skill, not make time and skill irrelevant.

To tie this all back to the topic, what I’m saying is that all of these symptoms are related to the same root cause. Until that dying root is pulled and a new tree is planted to give life, these symptoms will remain a problem with no visible cure. You can throw all the over the counter medication you want at someone to treat their symptoms, but they will still die of the AIDS that is attacking their system.


#217

I dont think anyone said there wasnt a cost and that it wasnt a massive factor. However the idea that it is the ONLY factor is still false…less so than it was 2-3 years ago for sure and sadly, most of the time it doesnt seem like there is any intention of changing that.

I have, played it, and most of the player base would not last an hour playing that game. It is just a completely different world. When Atlas came out it felt like that a little and it was so stagnant.

The carrot is less and less existent in this game.

Being told you are wrong is hardly being bullied. Having an opinion is one thing but throwing up random “facts” with almost no basis is an entirely different thing. Its easy for people to complain about how things are not going their way but very rarely do they offer tangible ideas let alone workable solutions.

Nothing wrong with this at all. My issues lie with the path people choose. Last time teams declared together you had two teams that ended up having a dozen banned between the two and the last cheated so badly they lost Atlas itself. Its not the mere idea there is a fight its how they do it. Same with a lot of the Atlas teams although either people are cheating less or they are getting caught less doing it, not sure which one.

The irony of this though…one alliance, of not even all diamond teams excels and look at how fast it gets called unfair, so…how would it work if all of diamond simply targeted one team? If it was anyone else the crying would be astronomical, just saying. I dont really expect that to be viewed through the same lens but its not even an entire league that is “working together” and already people feel like they are somehow being wronged.

Probably a bit of both, but that is also why the one size fits all model is never going to work. But at the same time when you create a divide when it comes to benefits, people are also outraged.

As I said before, you cant try to have people be clustered together and expected to incentivize competition at this stage. You need to their increase the beneficial gap to incentivize people to want and be willing to risk more, or you have to live with people banding together to support a certain status quo. Asking them to act against their own self interest makes less and less sense.

Trying to have an open world model is fine and all but trying to build it with the expectation that all teams will function at a similar level is absolutely crazy, its just not going to happen. Move prizing to a more team based versus purely individual model would allow teams to support their own players and allow for more diversity. Granted you would see a further gap between the level of each team but increasing the skill cap and rewarding it to some level would not be the worst thing either? The very foundation that made the game different was its team based model but more and more it comes down to individual expenditure, which I still think is a huge issue and will cause more cracks in the game than the developers understand.


#218

@Panda I agree with your response as a whole.

I guess I tend to think more in terms of the overall game than the power struggles at the top. I understand your position from up there, but I also see that it influences the entire game as a result.

The skill/pay gap is the biggest problem in this game and many other mobile games. I would have no issue with you having paid for more of an advantage as is your right in a free economy, but the fact that it is literally impossible for anyone to not spend (a lot of) money and reach end game content when it’s relevant is a huge problem. An excess of time spent with teammates who are also putting in the effort or money to make up for the lack of effort should be able to see you reach the finish line. Even if it is a little later (but still within a relevant timeframe) than your peers.


#219

The ones that have largely gone unaddressed? Those ones?

One thing that I really worry about tbh is how gear is going to scale. The current buff is insane, it creates a ridiculous divide that somehow technically anyone can obtain, and yet at the same time very few can. The dichotomy of it is so weird.

I think they really need to cap it at 100% per season and at the end of every season if you build up older pieces it allows people to get to say 50%(?). This would allow newer players to work hard in the season before and transition into the next one and allow for a bit of a legacy path. If your team is at the top you can still excel each season but you wont fall behind more than a specific number regardless of which season you started in. If not you are going to see people who are now at a disadvantage in dragons, base and gear…which modifies both of those.

I already said that prizing needs to be more team based versus pure individual expenditure. A good team should hopefully be able to support the growth and development of a solid player, which they can in some ways now but that divide is getting further and further so. Doing things like creating a D2 that basically has the same prize structure and expecting it not to be manipulated is beyond me how that was going to work.

Right now they best player spends and is super active and has some skill…continuing to push the game towards having that kind of super rare combination, I dont really see it lasting because there is are just going to be so few who can do all those at once.

Trying to transition and reward legacy playing is a huge issue that needs to be addressed as well, essentially putting people at a disadvantage the longer the play in some ways makes no sense. Having a refund system would probably go a long way although that opens itself up to probably a plethora of security loopholes as well.


#220

Agree with all of this as well.

And you misquoted me about Eve lol, I wasn’t saying you specifically never heard of/played it. Was more for the masses to do their own investigation on the topic of pay gaps and what games have become over the last 5-10 years. I never played it specifically because it’s 100000000x worse of an issue there. 100 platinum teams on a castle here would be laughed at if presented as a problem in Eve :joy:


#221

Yeah…for a while its been heading down a really odd path of it being “team based” but then everything being individualized. I feel like at some point they need to just pick one or the other. For reference, I did try out their new game Wild Beyond and I am on one of the better teams but it is basically War Dragons but without any semblance of team dynamic…so from what I can see, it might not even last as long as this game lol.

The problem with moving prizing to more team based is then people will say that a select group is being given an unfair advantage though? Not really sure how you combat that. And it probably does not fully address the divide between a team trying to grow and move up as @Tinsir said, where those teams seem to just become feeders for the ones at the top.

As far as Atlas, if they prizing was in a class of its own at the top, I still theorize that the teams would spend more of their time focused on each other and you would see less of it bleeding down to affect other aspects. Just random numbers but if you cut the number of Level 5 castles in half and then made their gain increase by a factor of 10x would the top teams be able to ignore their existence like they do now to some degree? Would it allow for alliances to work together but without such a wide distribution your gain would be be able to apply to dozens of teams?

Tbh, not sure if it would help and I doubt it would fix all the issues but it would hopefully move the fighting to a different subsection rather than it being a perceived free for all, allowing teams in a lower bracket to battle it out less hindered by the teams at the top?

Overall I would like to see more flexibility in the ability for team makeup and with Atlas being a whole new world, would like to see teams be able to be less constrained whereas right now for the majority it sounds pretty bleak tbh.

Whoops, that wasnt really my take away…I was just saying that early Atlas was a lot more like EVE and that was absolutely brutal on like 95% of the people playing it because they just had no interest in that style.


#222

I’ll have to go take a look at Wild Beyond. Hadn’t heard of it :beers:

Again, agree with the points you’ve made here. I was recently replying to a discussion about changes to War, you should check out some of what I’ve suggested there.

It’s not much to do with this, but as I stated there and will say here - many of the problems in this game overlap one another. I think people in life and in game are quick to blame the people who are taking full advantage of systems that are currently in place without understanding that the problem lies in the fact that the systems are set up that way to keep the pockets the people who run the system, as full as they can possibly get.

The problem is not that some people are making $85+/hr, the problem is that some are being paid $7/hr the same in life as it is here as the model is the same. Meaning that there is no problem with your strength and max content, the problem is that it isn’t available to those who are not already able to just go ahead and grab it. Wealth class limitations that prevent people from getting a foothold and prosper without dumb luck or inheritance of some kind.